ASI Director-General Gautam Sengupta said the list of India's treasures held abroad was "too long to handle" and there was a need for a "diplomatic and legal campaign" for their restitution from institutions, including the British Museum, the Royal Collection and the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery.

Exactly. This trial is not about doping or identifying dopers. Dopers are not charged in this case because doping was not illegal at the time. A judge has to follow the law that was in force at the time of the crime (Principle of Irretroactivity of Law). What is being discussed here is whether Fuentes and co., under the Law of 2006, committed a crime against public health.
The judge can't allow the names of the dopers to come out because she's obliged by law to protect their privacy. They are not the target of this trial, and we can't do anything about it. Neither can the judge.

They didn't seem very interested in protecting people's privacy a few years ago when they named and shamed a bunch of cyclists on the list.

I see that some Fedtards continue with their vicious festival of demagoguery and misinformation.

"Doping" was not a crime in Spain in 2006, as the authorities saw it as a sporting issue to be dealt with by the corresponding federations and not by criminal or civil courts. That is why the case brought against Fuentes is about "endangering the athletes' healths with dangerous practices", not about "doping", as you can't be prosecuted for an action that was not illegal when you committed it.

The judge may not allow Fuentes to reveal his clients' identity because it would breach their right to privacy. In the above scenario the sportsmen are the possible victims of Fuentes' dangerous practices, not the perpetrators of illegal activities.

I know all that and mentioned it : I just say it's a totally absurd situation.

And in the present case, the Spanish justice has never wanted to cooperate with the sports anti-doping organizations despite their multiple requests hence the public complaints of the WADA

Besides, the clients' "privacy" has been broken by Fuentes in this trial, but only as far as cyclists were concerned (Heras and a bunch of others), clearly because he has a deal with the Spanish justice about what he can say and what he cannot say. The judge did nothing to prevent him from revealing those names during the trial.

I don't like silent bans, but I understand the logic behind them. They are primarily used to punish players for missing drug tests.

If you told the world that X famous player was banned for six months for missing drug tests, everybody is going to assume they are on drugs. It will destroy their reputation and their commercial value, even though it hasn't actually been proven that they are doping.

A silent ban means they are still punished for breaking the rules, but they don't lose their presumption of innocence with regard to the actual doping.

Anyway, thanks for everyone who contributed here. I had been checking this thread for more than a year now, and before I found it, I didn't even think about doping might exist in tennis. But this thread changed my mind.

This is an interesting thread but hopefully there can less fanboys of EVERY player coming in here to try and denigrate other players or fans of other players.

Put simply: the idea that any player, however talented, could compete with other talented players that are doping is absurd. It doesn't matter how good you are, you will not be able to defeat top players that have ostensibly made superhuman (in some aspects) of the game or their fitness. Various PEDs do different things and they will not turn a player ranked #1500 into #1 but they would certainly be able to improve a player ranked, say, 10-15 in a top 6-8 player. And so on. So really if you're coming in here and trying to insult your least favourite player in the top 4 (and you're a fan of another top 4 player) then you should think long and hard about the implications of what you're saying.

Realistically either a huge majority of tennis players are on something - of varying quality, of course - or it's restricted to the very top players who via cult of personality can get away with it by way of being too valuable to the sport. Or no players are doping but that seems pretty unlikely given how lax the testing is in our sport.

This is an interesting thread but hopefully there can less fanboys of EVERY player coming in here to try and denigrate other players or fans of other players.

Put simply: the idea that any player, however talented, could compete with other talented players that are doping is absurd. It doesn't matter how good you are, you will not be able to defeat top players that have ostensibly made superhuman (in some aspects) of the game or their fitness. Various PEDs do different things and they will not turn a player ranked #1500 into #1 but they would certainly be able to improve a player ranked, say, 10-15 in a top 6-8 player. And so on. So really if you're coming in here and trying to insult your least favourite player in the top 4 (and you're a fan of another top 4 player) then you should think long and hard about the implications of what you're saying.

Realistically either a huge majority of tennis players are on something - of varying quality, of course - or it's restricted to the very top players who via cult of personality can get away with it by way of being too valuable to the sport. Or no players are doping but that seems pretty unlikely given how lax the testing is in our sport.